Polls show the majority of Americans in favor of gun control. Logically, there are clear steps to take if a society wants to control guns. But this will never happen according to the media reports after the Virginia Tech massacre.
But now is not the time to "rush to judgement." No, not when public attention is focused on the issue. That would not be the time to try to enact commonsense laws, or even revive some now expired no brainer legislation that would be a step in the right direction. Because the families affected wouldn't want this to never happen again.
After the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cautioned Tuesday against a "rush to judgment" on stricter gun control. A leading House supporter of restrictions on firearms conceded passage of legislation would be difficult.
"I think we ought to be thinking about the families and the victims and not speculate about future legislative battles that might lie ahead," said Reid, a view expressed by other Democratic leaders the day after the shootings that left 33 dead on the campus of Virginia Tech.
Which Harry Reid said this? Why, this one:
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) boasts of a favorable rating from the National Rifle Association, which lobbies against gun control, and House Democratic leaders are in no rush to jeopardize conservative freshmen elected from Republican-leaning districts in Indiana, North Carolina and Kansas.
We should certainly defer any discussion of the absurd availablity of automatic weapons to ANYONE AT ANY TIME to a future time, just like supposed raving liberal Kennedy says. If that future time never comes, well, we'll talk about it the next time there is a mass shooting.
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., was one of very few lawmakers to defer pushing for gun control in the early hours after the shootings. "There will be time to debate the steps needed to avert such tragedies," he said on Monday, "but today, our thoughts and prayers go to their families."
Instead we should focus on the grieving families, which in this country of course means pointing the finger at anything but the real problem. Or perhaps we should be getting started on the project of routing out all insanity or possible insanity in our society. Lone gunmen, beware. Because this would be easier to achieve than a weapon ban. Like so many other countries already have had for years.
Another option proposed deserves our attention. Teachers should be trained in the use of weapons, so they can defend their vulnerable classes from such gunmen in the future. Then, if none of the students are packing heat on the day the homicidal maniac visits, and thus are sitting ducks, the teacher can step in and "Do what is necessary." This is the actual position of gun advocates, so it must make sense.
Other than the "this is not the time" trope, politicians are getting a lot of mileage out of the "blame democratic minorities" theme. Because the NRA and gun owners are a more active vocal minority, they are an insupperable barrier to making progress on gun control. This is why we cannot be expected to give a hearing to what is the majority view in this country, that gun control law is a reasonable area for development.
One senior Democrat, Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, said gun rights advocates are simply too influential to allow a tightening of gun control laws. "It's a regional thing, it's a cultural thing," Rangel said, arguing that even in areas where 85 percent of the people support more restrictions, the 15 percent minority is far more active and outspoken.
This is because American politicians and officials and judges never do things majorities of Americans don't agree with.
Are you following?
No comments:
Post a Comment